Redacted (2007)

Very well executed

the audience applauded

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

Redacted is different from other Iraq War films. Firstly, it doesn't portray the US soldiers as the heroes they aren't. I mean, some are heroes of course, but not all. Other films seem to have a way of twisting war crimes and crimes against humanity into pro-war propaganda, but this film makes no attempt at that. Although crudely edited in some parts, as though on MovieMaker or the like, and although some of the acting is slightly amateurish, I do have to give this film a 6. The main reason is due to the courageous nature as aforementioned. The film portrays events as they were, i.e. it was a war, nothing more, nothing less, and certainly not glamorous. It was nice to see a different perspective when it comes to modern war films. To conclude, without intending to contradict myself, I do feel some of the US soldiers could have been portrayed in a better light as, like all groups, it only takes a small minority to get the others a bad name. Worth a watch for something different.

This movie was an unbelievable piece of garbage. This movies narrative takes a dive about 2 minutes in and does not ever recover. The few scenes meant to be powerful are just cheap and disgusting. The scenes in question are pragmatically impossible, this movie has no regard for military protocol, illustrated by the two privates completely disobeying orders from their corporal. I generally would give directors the benefit of the doubt because of their artistic liscense , but if you're going to make such a strong statement against the military then you have to be more realistic in its portrayal. Even if one were to say that the director is doing this on purpose to offer a self-critique, this is completely refuted by the end sequence of pictures of peoples dead relatives for added shock value. I(who have quite a bit of military knowledge) find this movie irresponsible at best. Its this kinda of ready shoot aim propaganda that leads to wars this messed up.

I'm sorry, but I'm left of Lenin liberal. I am against the war and how it is propagated, and am aghast at the heavy handed, insensitive tactics and attitude of the US soldiers that I've witnessed in Iraq.however, this movie doesn't depict that. Rather, it represents the US soldier as a one dimensional cartoon, stupid beyond stupid. The caricature can only appeal to ardent anti-Americans (as we have seen in these comments) and utterly repel people who might otherwise have an open mind (as we've also seen in these comments). One soldier actually says "Waxing hajis is like stepping on cockroaches." I'm sorry - that simply does not happen and has not happened. The Americans are a lot of things, but cold blooded psychopaths is not one of them. However, the movie doesn't stop there - it turns them into criminal pedophile rapists too.If the acting and script were much much much better than they are, the film might just pass for insightful satire - much like Apocalypse now "overdid" the Vietnam war to draw attention to its absurdities and its effects on the psyche of all involved. However, this movie fails miserably in these aims. The actors are awful - just awful. They don't resemble US soldiers in physical appearance or mannerisms. Each one screams "low budget, effeminate Hollywood extra." It doesn't help that the script turns them into the most cardboard of caricatures. Honestly, at some point I expected them to start eating kittens.The political message it tries to make is needed and all in all decent. However, the acting stinks and the script is poorly written so that it just comes across as so very staged and fake.This movie has been deservedly forgotten. "Three Kings", which is about the first Persian gulf war, ironically is still the best movie as of this writing about the second Persian gulf war even though the second of course started years after "three kings" was made. Such is the paucity on quality film on the Iraq War (and, before you think anything, I thought "Hurt Locker" was pretty awful too).

The medium is the message, so said Marshall McLuhan. This means of course that our reaction to news is dependent on how it is presented. We seeing is often more believable than reading for example.McLuhan would easily admit the Redacted is flawed, but at the same time he may just praise it for proving his point. Brian de Palma's latest film takes him away from what he has done for pretty much his entire career. This motion picture is very much a case of substance over style (not the other way around). Well I wouldn't say it has no style. de Palma still relies on a visual format to help, but this is new terrain for him. Redacted is a multimedia recreational documentary of events surrounding a gang rape in Iraq where a pair of US soldiers sexually assaulted and killed a fifteen year old girl. They were later turned in by their buddy who refused to take part. He got the news out on a Youtube video wearing a mask.At first glance, Reacted appears as a black-and-white statement; an anti American dis- approval of the war in Iraq. Even when one stops to think for a moment, it is still hard to deny that the film is against the war, but it is NOT necessarily anti American. De Palma is open to giving an explanation for why these boys would resort to such behaviour. It is not because they are dumb or under educated, but more because after spending so long so far away from home in dreadful conditions, they begin to loose a sense of humanity. There is a difference between being an ass and being crazy.Redacted's problem I think is not so much a question of smarts, but a question of set-up. The introduction feels too much like a Godard movie. De Palma's decision to use clips of a French documentary for setting exposition make the beginning seem kind of muddled and unclear. What is this movie about? the people or the place? Redacted's multi media approach has a very visceral effect on the viewer, but its side effect is that it is ill equips for story telling, due to a sense of choppiness. One of the downsides of realism, which I have never been partial to, but this one, is actually pretty good. I think it is educational, and strong enough to recommend